BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1148|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1148
Author: Pavley (D)
Amended: 8/30/12
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES & WATER COMM. : 5-3, 4/10/12
AYES: Pavley, Kehoe, Padilla, Simitian, Wolk
NOES: La Malfa, Cannella, Fuller
NO VOTE RECORDED: Evans
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/24/12
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Dutton
SENATE FLOOR : 24-14, 5/31/12
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, De León, DeSaulnier,
Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu,
Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio,
Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Correa,
Dutton, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa,
Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner, Strickland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-25, 8/24/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Fish and Game Commission: Department of Fish
and Game
SOURCE : Author
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill establishes a program for review,
approval, and oversight of mitigation and conservation
banks, to establish base fees for numerous licenses which
are currently set in statue, and explicitly requires
trustee agencies to participate in the preparation of the
State Environmental Goals and Policy Report.
Assembly Amendments change the Senate language concerning
mitigation and conservation banks and add other provisions
concerning the Trout and Steelhead Conservation and
Management Planning Act of 1978.
ANALYSIS : This bill makes numerous changes to implement
policy recommendations arising out of a Strategic Vision
process for the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the
Fish and Game Commission (FGC) in order to improve the
effectiveness of these entities in protecting and managing
state fish and wildlife resources. Specifically, this
bill:
1. States legislative findings and declarations regarding
the Strategic Vision process that was initiated as a
result of the passage of AB 2376 in 2010 and the need
for reforms to improve and enhance the capacity of DFG
and FGC. States legislative intent to focus more of the
work of the FGC on implementing state hunting and
fishing laws, and to enhance DFG's ability to focus on
managing its lands, its enforcement responsibilities,
its conservation programs, and enhancing the scientific
basis of DFG's decisions.
2. Requires the Office of Planning & Research (OPR) to
include trustee agencies such as DFG in developing the
state Environmental Goals and Policy Report.
3. Modifies and updates requirements related to sustainable
management of the state's hatchery program and native
fisheries, including the following:
A. States legislative findings and declarations
regarding the role of hatcheries and the importance
of genetic diversity in managing California native
trout species, and that DFG seek to provide diverse
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
3
recreational angling opportunities.
B. Requires DFG to make publicly available on its
Internet website information on the inventory of
California trout streams maintained by DFG.
C. Requires DFG every five years to update the state
Strategic Plan for Trout Management adopted in 2003,
and specifies objectives the plan shall be intended
to ensure, including providing angling opportunities,
conserving wild and native trout, and ensuring
environmental sustainability and overall ecosystem
watershed health.
D. Requires the plan to be guided by specified
considerations including adaptive management of trout
populations to be self-sustaining, increasing angler
satisfaction, ensuring appropriate age distribution
of wild trout, and establishing ecologically and
environmentally sustainable hatchery and stocking
practices for native trout.
E. Requires DFG to prepare trout management plans
consistent with the Strategic Plan for Trout
Management, for all wild trout waters within three
years following designation of a wild trout water by
the FGC, and to update the plans every five years.
F. Requires priority to be given for stocking native
hatchery-produced species where stocking is
determined appropriate by DFG. Provides that waters
where stocking is not appropriate include waters
where stocking would adversely affect species listed
under state or federal endangered species acts.
Requires hatchery-produced trout to be stocked to
support sustainable angling opportunities and fishing
access, including urban fisheries.
G. Requires DFG to ensure that trout stocked for
recreational purposes are unable to reproduce, with
specified exceptions.
H. Requires DFG to form a strategic trout management
team to oversee trout management statewide pursuant
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
4
to the Strategic Plan for Trout Management. Requires
DFG's Strategic Plan for Trout Management to be
reviewed by the Strategic Trout Management Team, the
hatchery operations committee, and an ad hoc peer
review committee to ensure sound management, improved
genetic diversity, and best available science.
I. Deletes obsolete provisions relating to state
hatchery production goals and clarifies that the
state hatchery production goal is 2.75 pounds of
released trout per sport fishing license sold, and
that a predominant number of released fish be
catchable size or larger.
J. States that at least $2 million dedicated under
existing law to the Heritage and Wild Trout program
from the Hatcheries and Inland Fisheries Fund (HIFF)
may be used for development of trout management
plans, and that up to 25% may be expended for
watershed restoration projects, resource assessment
and scientific inquiry. Clarifies that funds from
the HIFF may be used for development of the state
Strategic Plan for Trout Management, and states that
funding for Heritage Trout Waters is a priority for
the HIFF.
K. Requires DFG on an annual basis to invest in
hatchery facility improvements and rehabilitation to
ensure progress towards achieving hatchery production
targets.
L. Authorizes DFG, beginning January 1, 2015, to
obtain hatchery-produced fish from any
California-based hatchery if all of the following
criteria are met:
(1) The hatchery production goal of 2.75 pounds
of released trout per sport fishing license sold
is not met;
(2) DFG, following an inspection, determines the
hatchery is in compliance with standards that are
as stringent as those in effect at state
hatcheries in order to minimize the risk of the
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
5
spread of disease or invasive species; and,
(3) The cost per pound of the fish provided by
the hatchery does not exceed the cost of state
hatchery fish calculated equivalently, including
transportation costs.
(4) Appropriates $1 million from the Hatchery
and Inland Fisheries Fund to DFG for capital
outlay expenditures necessary for improvements to
state hatcheries to achieve hatchery fish
production goals. Requires DFG to prioritize
capital outlay investments based on expected
improvements in hatchery egg and fish production.
4. Establishes a program for review, approval and oversight
of mitigation and conservation banks as follows:
A. States legislative findings and declarations
regarding the values and importance of conservation
and mitigation banks in providing habitat lands which
are managed to fulfill mitigation requirements, and
the need for greater transparency to ensure
mitigation requirements are fully met and to fund the
regulatory costs of DFG related to mitigation and
conservation banks.
B. Requires any person seeking to establish a
mitigation or conservation bank to submit a bank
prospectus to DFG with a fee of $10,000 to cover the
costs of DFG's review. Specifies what must be
included in a bank prospectus. Establishes procedures
for DFG's review and approval of a bank prospectus.
C. Authorizes any person interested in establishing a
bank to submit an optional draft prospectus for
review by DFG, accompanied by a fee of $1,500 to
cover DFG's costs, with total review fees for a
prospectus not to exceed $10,000.
D. Once the bank prospectus is approved, allows the
applicant to submit a bank agreement package to DFG
consistent with the prospectus and include specified
information. Requires payment of a $25,000 fee to
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
6
cover DFG's review. Establishes procedures for DFG's
review and approval of the package, including
authority for assessment of additional fees if
necessary to cover DFG's review of new information or
substantial changes requested by the applicant.
E. Provides similar procedures and fee requirements
for amendments to approved banks.
F. Prohibits any bank from being operative, vested or
final, and prohibits any bank credits from being
issued, until DFG has provided written approval of a
bank and a conservation easement has been recorded on
the site.
G. Requires DFG after a bank is approved to conduct
compliance review and to establish and maintain a
database, available on DFG's website or another
website that is linked to DFG's website, which allows
bank sponsors to update information about mitigation
and conservation banks.
H. Requires DFG to provide an annual report to the
Legislature on the mitigation and conservation bank
program.
I. Requires DFG to collect a total payment of $60,000
per bank to cover all or a portion of DFG's bank
implementation and compliance costs, with payments
due following credit releases.
J. Requires DFG to annually adjust mitigation and
conservation bank fees to reflect changes in the
Implicit Price Deflator, and requires DFG to adopt
guidelines and criteria to implement mitigation and
conservation bank requirements. The guidelines shall
incorporate information from a 2011 Memorandum of
Understanding the state entered with federal agencies
for purposes of jointly establishing a coordinated
approach to mitigation and conservation banking in
California.
5. Makes the following changes relating to fees charged for
fish and game activities:
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
7
A. Requires FGC to adjust license, stamp, permit and
tag fees for inflation based on changes in the
Implicit Price Deflator, pursuant to Section 713 of
the Fish and Game Code, at least every five years.
B. Requires, with regard to the fees for lifetime
sportsmen's licenses, sport and commercial fishing
licenses, commercial fish business and vessel
licenses, hunting licenses, ocean sport fishing
enhancement stamps, commercial fishing enhancement
stamps, and trapping licenses that the FGC adjust the
license fees to recover, but not exceed, all
reasonable administrative and implementation costs of
DFG and the FGC relating to those licenses.
C. Provides that except where the Fish and Game Code
expressly prohibits the adjustment of statutorily
imposed fees, the FGC may establish a fee or the
amount thereof by regulation. Requires that fees
established by the FGC shall be in an amount
sufficient to recover all reasonable administrative
and implementation costs of the FGC and DFG relating
to the program for which the fee is paid. Authorizes
the FGC to establish a fee structure to phase in fee
adjustments to provide for full cost recovery within
five years.
D. Clarifies the DFG's authority to establish and
adjust fees for CEQA filings, streambed alteration
agreements, and scientific collector permits.
Requires that the fees be sufficient to recover all
reasonable administrative and implementation costs
and authorizes DFG to establish a fee structure to
phase in fee adjustments to provide for full cost
recovery within five years.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1. Unknown workload costs to DFG and the commission to
review and adjust fees as needed (special funds). These
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
8
costs should be covered by fee revenue, which DFG and
the commission can set to ensure they do so. However,
there may be a lag between the time DFG and the
commission develop and adopt fees and the time any
resulting revenue increase is realized. It is not clear
DFG or the commission has the resources to cover these
activities from other funds until they receive
additional fee revenue.
2. Ongoing costs of an unknown amount, but potentially
exceeding $1 million dollars annually, to DFG to mark
hatchery-produced trout (special fund).
3. Ongoing cost in the tens of thousands of dollars to DFG
to support the strategic trout management team (special
fund).
4. Significant costs, likely in the low millions of dollars
annually, to DFG to plan, review, establish and monitor
conservation and mitigation bank programs (special
fund). These costs should be fully covered by the fees
the bill authorizes DFG to collect from applicants.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/31/12)
Green California
Humane Society of United States
Humboldt Baykeeper
Klamath Riverkeeper
Laguna Ocean Foundation
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Natural Resource Banking Coalition
Natural Resources Defense Council
Nature Conservancy
OCdiving.com
Ocean Conservancy
Orange County Coastkeeper
Otter Project
Paw Pac
Russian Riverkeeper
San Diego Coastkeeper
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
Save Our Shores
Trout Unlimited
CONTINUED
SB 1148
Page
9
WiLDCOAST
Wildlands Conservancy
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters of this bill note the
long overdue need for reform of the state's wildlife
management and in particular highlight support for the
provisions transferring responsibility for ongoing
management of California's MPAs, now that the network of
MPAs has been established, to the OPC. Opponents in
particular objected to provisions included in prior
versions clarifying strict liability for fish and game code
violations and creating a private cause of action. The
private cause of action and strict liability provisions
were deleted from this bill in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee. As a result of the amendments taken, opposition
was removed by the Realtors, Western Growers, California
State Association of Counties, Regional Council of Rural
Counties, Civil Justice Association, California Central
Valley Flood Control Association, El Dorado County
Irrigation District, Valley Ag Water Coalition which are
now neutral.
DLW:m 8/31/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED